Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 3936773, member: 112&quot;]I wondered if that was not the case as it often is when people try all sorts of different methods. They simply want the coins in they own to &quot;look better&quot; - at least what they think looks better. It all goes back to what I have referred to as the &quot;bright and shiny&quot; syndrome in many other threads.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I agree with the concept but electrolysis is not an non invasive method. It is a harmful method, just one of many forms of harsh cleaning.</p><p><br /></p><p>Which brings me to what I see as being the true benefit of experiments like these - learning how to identify coins that have been harshly cleaned with this method. Ya see, when this method is used coins always have a very distinct look. It is a look that often fools the beginners, inexperienced, and or uneducated collectors, but a knowledgeable collector will recognize it at a glance, just as he will the many other forms of harsh cleaning.</p><p><br /></p><p>That said, there are methods that can be used to clean coins without harming them, but they are very few in number. And these methods do make the coins &quot;look better&quot; by removing contaminants, sometimes potentially harmful contaminants, from the coins. But at the same time they leave the coins looking natural for their condition. </p><p><br /></p><p>Bottom line, when a coin has been properly cleaned, that cleaning cannot be detected - except by using deductive reasoning. </p><p><br /></p><p>But any harsh or improper cleaning can be detected by those with the knowledge and experience to do so.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in